We all watch
television in different ways and for different reasons. There are so many ways
to watch television shows, whether it is live, online or through a recording
device. It makes it so difficult to understand television ratings that are used
to decide on whether to keep a show going or not. We watch what we want to, as
long as we enjoy it. The “Nielsen Cross Platform Report” stated that, “Nielsen
data shows that consumers are willing to pay for high-quality TV
content—they’re just looking for the right fit for their needs” (pg. 1). We all
have cable bills, it is usually the first utility that people look to sign up
for when they move into a new house or apartment. The decision then comes down
to what package you should get and what channels do you need to absolutely have
in that package. We all have it in the back of our mind that we will likely
watch a program or two online or another device but it is always a plus to have
the ability to watch the television show live. We watch it live or catch up on
programs for several social reasons.
In the McQuail Reader, Celia Von
Feilitzen states, “Television’s most important social functions are thus that
one can identify with and obtain an almost real contact with people on
television, that viewing has become a well-established habit, and that the
programmes provide topics of conversation” (Feilitzen 359). As we have talked about
in class, people love to talk about their favorite television shows with their
friends. If their friends do not watch that show, they will often be forced to
catch up on the show online or watch it when a repeat is aired. Also, many
people like to compare themselves to characters on a TV show. There are so many
times where people will sit around and say, “You are just like Ted on How I Met
Your Mother,” or something like that. It gives us something in common and it is
kind of interesting to think that we can be a character on a television show.
The ability to put ourselves into
a television character’s role is what makes ratings so important to fans and
producers. So when reading “What TV Ratings Really Mean”, I was shocked when I
saw the Nielsen Ratings say, “For our national ratings estimates, we use a
sample of approximately 10,000 households, containing about 30,000 people who
have agreed to participate” (pg. 3). They went on to say that there are more than
100 million households. It is tough to decide what program is good and what
people really like when you take such a small sample. That’s why when we hear
our favorite show may go off the air, most people are surprised because they
thought it was a great show and really enjoyed it but television station
executives only look at these national ratings that may not be entirely
accurate.
However, TV ratings mean a lot to
television station. In a USA Today article, “CBS has given a thumbs-up to most
of its prime-time series for next season in a sweeping renewal notice two months
ahead of the network's formal May schedule announcement” (Levin). To renew so
many shows so early is unheard of. They have obviously made these decisions
based on what they see on the ratings that we may not fully understand. The
executives know what to look for from the fans and they are clearly seeing
successful shows. I’m not very surprised with the announcement, as once I read
the article, I realized that some of my favorite shows are CBS and they have
been great. It’s tough to keep up with television shows when we are such a busy
society. So to see CBS declare this so early is great for them as a broadcast
channel, which really has to try to appeal to a mass amount of people rather
then cable stations.
There are many reasons and ways
to watch television shows these days. It makes it difficult for rating systems,
like Nielsen, to get accurate information for ratings. We are so influenced to
watch television because of its social nature that if we miss a program, we won’t
have that feeling of satisfaction or identification. That is why watching shows
online is happening more and more, because we cannot always catch a program on
its scheduled time or day.
Feilitzen, Celia Von.
"Needs as an Explanatory Factor of Television Viewing." McQuail's
Reader in Mass Communication Theory. Ed. Denis McQuail. Thousand Oaks: SAGE
Publications, 2002. 359.
Levin, Gary.
"CBS renews 18 shows for fall." USA Today. (14 March
2012) Print.
“State of
the Media." Cross Platform Report. 1.
What TV
Ratings Really Mean. 3.
I think you make strong points in identifying media consumption’s ability to act as a social buffer. Many casual conversations throughout the day are based on current media products; whether it is sports, current events, celebrity news, etc. In the Celia Von Feiltzen article, she makes a point the point that the act of television viewing, “has become a well-established habit, and that the programs provide topics of conversation,” (Feiltzen, 159). This I believe is very accurate in describing one role media plays within our society. By referring to media products, we can interact with people on a regular basis by using this platform as common ground. Another interesting point you make is the identification factor that television plays. Many times we feel a connection, through self-identification with a character. In the Baron and Davis reading, they explain, “we all make decision about which content we choose based on our expectation of having some need met,” (Baron and Davis, 246). Whether this need is entertainment, escape, self-identification, socialization, or fandom; the content we in fact choose fulfills some requirement.
ReplyDeleteThis socialization and self-identification, as well as the whole uses and gratification model, is what makes them so profitable. The attention garnered is a home run for advertisers, which then leads to the heavy importance placed on the Nielsen Ratings by TV executives. As stated in the Blog Post, many decision makers rely on the Nielsen Ratings when it comes to selecting products to be presented to the public. Another interesting point made in the blog, is that it takes such a small percentage of households into account, how can it be so accurate? Perhaps this is why we see shows disappear and then reemerge due to fan interaction, similarly to the recent return of NBC’s show Community. Another point made, is that many television shows are online now, which can make it difficult to track and consider in terms of viewership and a show’s success. However, I think there is a difference in legal versus illegal online viewership. Legal viewership, perhaps through a company’s official website (NBC.com or ABC.com for example) are useful in allowing for viewers to stay current with their shows; since there is still advertising dollars to be made and viewers can be accounted for. Additionally, things such as amazon and iTunes allow for accounting of viewers.
When it comes to the media, everybody wants to be in the know. No one wants to be left out of conversation and if you don’t know what the rest of the public is talking about when speaking about the media then you are. Uses and gratifications is a large reason why DVR and TiVo have been so popular. People can’t stand to miss an episode because then they won’t know what everyone else is talking about the next day. No one wants to be the last to know in any given situation let alone media events. I think this is also why YouTube videos become more and more popular because everyone sees one video and starts talking about it and then you just have to go watch to check it out for yourself. “Social situations can provide realms of expectations of familiarity with media, which must be met to sustain membership in specific social groups” (Baran & Davis 255). I think a main reason we are so active in the media is because of the social aspect of it. I recall when the movie Avatar came to theaters. I had no desire to see the movie but everyone was talking about. Eventually I got so tired of hearing how awesome it was and not knowing what everyone was talking about that I went to go see it. It becomes the same with popular television shows and not wanting to miss an episode of your favorite show. “Television’s most important social functions are thus that one can identify with and obtain an almost real contact with people on television , that viewing has become a well-established habit, and that the programmes provide topics of conversation” (Feilitzen 359). You can talk about it with your friends and it gives you this sense of “status” (Feilitzen 359). The uses and gratifications method holds true in the fact that I think people want to be in the know and media helps them to do that.
ReplyDeleteA large part of the uses and gratifications method being hard to really calculate is because I think many people don’t want to admit they watch something because their friends watch it. But I also don’t think companies are really looking too much into uses and gratifications when planning TV shows because they rely so heavily on ratings. Neilson ratings are extremely important to television companies, they base their entire view on how the show is doing off of them. Programming departments work extremely close with ratings each week to paint a picture of how their shows were doing and how their network was doing as a whole. Also it’s extremely important to not only know how many people were watching their shows but also their competition. Ratings allow networks to see what their competitors are doing and gain confidence by excelling in ratings and knowing you have to really revamp and kick up your programming because you are lagging behind your competitors. Although ratings can be helpful in this way that they give you the raw data of how many people are watching in a small sample, I agree that it is rather hard to really get into the mind of a viewer and consumer just with these numbers. However I wonder if people would really admit to being socially persuaded to view certain media if uses and gratifications research was used to base show success off of rather than ratings numbers.
Shannon Fitzmaurice- Post #1
ReplyDeleteI find it hard to believe that in this new day and age of rising technology, that television stations are not completely taking cross-platform ratings into consideration. According to the article published by Nielsen Ratings “What TV Ratings Really Mean”, Nielsen claims they have a diverse sample of 10,000 households to represent 100 million Americans with television. They explain they have “specially selected” households that have installed TV sets, DVRs, VCRs, cable boxes, video games and satellite dishes” (5). Why doesn’t Nielsen take into consideration the college students or struggling “twenty-somethings” that cannot afford cable or satellite, but are able to afford Internet service. Different socio-economic backgrounds most likely have different tastes. I am not saying an upper middle class member cannot enjoy the same shows a lower middle class member, however the lower middle class member should be properly represented. For argument’s sake, I am going to focus on college students and their role in television ratings.
The first time I really saw how the Nielsen ratings system was flawed was during the late 2009-early 2010 late night war between Jay Leno and Conan O’Brien. In a nutshell, Jay Leno agreed to step aside after 17 years to let Late Night talk show host Conan O’Brien move up the NBC night time ladder. Leno agreed to this as he would create a similar talk show style program during the 10 pm primetime hour. Within several months of the transition, it became clear Leno’s 10pm show was a disaster and with no people watching, there was no people to stay tuned to the Tonight Show with Conan O’Brien. NBC offered Leno his 11:35 pm Tonight Show slot back, and would move O’Brien to 12:05 am. O’Brien argued he no longer would be the host of the Tonight Show, and instead would be broadcasted on “The Morning After Show.” O’Brien tried negotiating, and in January 2010, he left the network.
During this time I was not able to understand why NBC would let go of O’Brien. O’Brien created not only a loyal fan base to himself but also to NBC. Within days of his announcement of leaving the network, there were hundreds of thousands of supporters on “Team Coco’s” Facebook page promising wherever O’Brien ends up, they will follow. How could NBC cancel a show that had such loyal watchers? What I came to realize that is also explained in a Nielsen report “The Cross-Platform Report” that adults 50-64 make up the largest segment of the traditional TV audience, while O’Brien’s fan base is made up of mostly 16-30 year olds (1). His fan base was not watching him on television, but they were watching the show the next day on sites such as hulu.com or nbc.com. This age group was either sleeping or doing homework by 11:35 pm, and was not tuning into real time television. In addition, O’Brien humor most likely did not translate well to the 50-64 age group, which led to the demise of O’Brien’s career at NBC. It was during that time that I started to realize television-rating systems were flawed.
Shannon Fitzmaurice- Post #2
ReplyDeleteJust recently, NBC tried not to repeat history by keeping its sitcom Community on air. After not renewing the show for the second half of the 2011-2012 season because of poor ratings, fans caused uproar on the Internet and also protested at Rockefeller Center in New York and at NBC Los Angeles studios. NBC finally climbed out under their “30 Rock” to realize that with a growing age of technology, maybe viewers are watching shows other than on television. Community has started up again Thursday, March 15.
One show that has a loyal fan base but is doing very poorly in ratings is ABC’s Cougar Town. Created by Bill Lawrence, the creator of the popular 2000s show Scrubs, Cougar Town has not been positively recognized by ABC. There have been rumors ABC is not going to renew the sitcom, and those rumors have been made vocal by Cougar Town’s very own Bill Lawrence on his Twitter account. For months Lawrence has interacted with his audience listening to words of encouragement and giving updates on renewing the show. After taking a similar hiatus Community was forced to take, Cougar Town returned with less than spectacular ratings. The fan base is rallying for more support on the Internet. As Lawrence tweeted on March 20, 2012, “Such a blast when you all say nice crap about the show. Sincere thanks. Ratings-shmatings. #CougarTown.” We are in an age where cross-platform media is at an all time high and where producers are taking ratings results with a grain of salt. It’s time for Nielsen to alter its ratings system.
I'm so glad you (and many others, I should add) mentioned the Nielsen ratings. As an avid fan of all things television, I find the ratings system to be abhorring and I’m actually dedicating my final project trying to find an alternative to the system.
ReplyDeleteIn the pamphlet “What TV Ratings Really Mean”, Nielsen describes their rating system “as being similar to voting.” Granted, this goes into issues I have about electoral systems in general, but the idea that television ratings is similar to voting (no matter what Nielsen says in the next few lines) is a jarring one because of the statistic Scott put up: there are over 100 million households in the United States with a television set but the Nielsen ratings are based on samples of 10,000 households with about 30,000 participants (Nielsen). That means each household represents about 10,000 households – a lot of emphasis to be put on the viewing habits of one house.
There are several reasons I have issues with the ratings system, but I won’t go into all of them (have to save something for the paper). In the other Nielsen pamphlet, the “Cross Platform Report”, the last page shows how 91% of all TV households paid for a subscription in the first quarter of 2011. That means that about 91 million households, or an approximate 273 million people, are paying to watch television. They are paying to be entertained, be current, be up to date, be able to follow their sports team or catch up on the latest movie. They are spending money on an institution that has been available for “free” for decades and has become increasingly more specific in terms of options offered. And yet, of those 273 million people, we don’t know how many of them are in possession of Nielsen meters and thus we don’t know how many of those 273 million people are being accurately represented. While Nielsen can claim their research methods “have been developed and refined over many years” (What TV Ratings Actually Mean), it still does a poor job of representing the entire population accurately. When you are paying for television content, and you don’t feel represented by a ratings system that is the core of how the very industry is run, that might be a problem.
I have often wondered if I have somehow managed to transcend the ability to be “gratified” by watching television shows because I spend so much time reading up on the industry and how it works and I am left so devastated by the whims of executives. I would like to think that I am in the minority, that I am one of a few thousand people who are so into TV they are unable to be completely entertained by it without wondering if their favorite shows will see it through to completion (which might be a bummer if you spend, say, seven years following the exploits of Ted Mosby and then are left in the lurch because CBS has canceled “How I Met Your Mother” – which they haven’t yet, to their credit). But the Nielsen “Cross Platform Report” also shows just how connected the United States audience (read: their sampled audience) is these days. While the numbers on just how many people are connected to the internet and television are unspecific, it is easy to surmise that it represents a majority of the population now. This means that more people have access to the information that, for a long time, only belonged exclusively to industry insiders and enthusiasts with subscriptions to magazines and journals: just how the industry operates. It is no coincidence that efforts to save television shows have ratcheted up in recent years, because the internet has made the ability to do so easier – whether it was sending peanuts to CBS to save “Jericho” or ordering $5 footlongs from Subway to save “Chuck.” We have learned that fandom, a group of people who derive a LOT of gratification from watching television shows (I know this as a fan), are willing to connect with other fans and spend money in order to save a show, and that sometimes the heartbreak can get very real very weirdly.
The ratings system needs an overhaul because the nature of television, their audience and their gratifications have changed. Granted, using extreme fans as an example might not be the best idea for that argument (there were a lot of peanuts to clean at CBS, and Subway made a lot of money from “Chuck” fans) but I think that this might become more of a norm rather than an exception.
DeleteThere are over 300 million people in the US, and a huge chunk of them own TVs. It’s just weird that only 30,000 people speak for ALL of them.
T.V. watching for me is limited due to my schedule, having 4 people in the house and only having 1 T.V. in the house that has cable. We have AT&T U-VERSE which was a really exciting thing only because now we could have more access to channels and now have the ability to record more shows then before with Charter. So, in order for me or anyone else to catch up we have to record all of our shows but even then I don’t always get the chance to catch up when I would like to. So, I have started to try and catch up online but even that is difficult for me to do because I am used to just watching movies in my room on my T.V. instead of shows. But, I have found that the shows that are talked about in my classes or in the hallways walking to class or even sitting in the café eating, are shows that I have never watched, had interest in or even heard of. So, I have recently started to go online to just catch tid-bits of some shows just to get an understanding of what exactly is the new popular show(s). I have a hard time keeping up with it all because I don’t get the chance to watch TV like I wish I could. I don’t know everything about how it all works I have to gain the information from classmates, friends or by reading articles or attempting to keep up with it all. Understanding how the ratings are done seems to be the best way to get some sort of idea. But I have always wondered how exactly shows become rated and popular and when reading “What TV Ratings Really Mean” by Nielsen, I found some of those answers about how shows actually become the top rated and the most popular show. “The ratings numbers that you may read about in the newspaper are the “average audience rating,” or the percent of television viewers tuned to particular program during the average minute.” (Nielsen 2007). It also goes on to say to give a basic explanation, “So when the Nielsen reports that a show is “top ranked” for the week, we are saying that this is the show that was watched by more people than anything else on any channel at anytime during the week. It is literally the most popular show because its audience is the largest.” (Nielsen 2007).
ReplyDeleteHow and what Nielsen measures is important in determining what people watch, ranking the highest watched shows and having the influence on the audience to keep those shows the highest ranked shows. Knowing what is the most popular shows I can see has a huge effect on people and what they watch, I know that hearing about certain shows in class, I will if I find them at all interesting, I will go online look it up and see for myself, that adds to the high ratings that show may already have. “Measuring TV sets in a specially selected sample of homes, Nielsen technicians install metering equipment on TV sets, DVRs, VCRs, cable boxes, video games and satellite dishes.” (Nielsen 2007). The process of knowing or identifying what TV programs are being watched and what channel they are on, is complex but its all about collecting all the schedules from every TV station in the country, and for the primary source of information comes from programs airing because Nielsen has codes which are embedded into programs. All of this leads to the measuring of TV shows and the audience, it also seems to help gain the inside information of the audiences and what they want in a show and what they don’t based on the most popular shows. Everything is flawed and TV shows that may end up being really good to others but not enough ratings are canceled. I wish I could have more understanding and see it all in action by watching TV but its hard to do that.
POST CON'T:
ReplyDeleteBut, I think I will have to find the time in order to figure out what TV shows are good and why some people are in an uproar about the problems TV stations and shows cause.
The amount of TV viewership has increased, according to the Cross-Platform Report, “Overall TV viewership increased 22 minutes per month per person over last year, demonstrating moderate growth and reaming the dominant source of video content for all demographics.” (page 1). And the options to view shows isn’t limited to just TV sets, mobile devices, ipods, computers, video game consoles, and more.
What TV Ratings Really Mean. Nielsen Report.
“State of the Media.” Cross-Platform Report. Nielsen.